[ppml] RE: [arin-announce] NRO Response to ITU Comments on the Management of Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses

Lee Howard lhoward at blackboard.com
Wed Nov 17 13:54:10 EST 2004

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On 
> Behalf Of Gregory Massel
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:32 PM
> To: richardj at arin.net; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] RE: [arin-announce] NRO Response to ITU 
> Comments on the Management of Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses
> I still believe that ARIN members "effectively" (note I used 
> that word in my
> previous email as well) control ARIN policy, because they 
> have the greatest
> understanding of ARIN and presence on the PPML and at ARIN 
> meetings. I stand
> to be corrected. 

Your point being that the ARIN could do better at outreach, not
that the ITU does better than ARIN.

> Until then, my only
> interaction with ARIN was to apply for IP addresses and ASNs and even
> through such interaction I did not become aware that I had 
> any influence
> over the policies governing those requests.

Usually just before meetings ARIN's web site says, "Make your
opinions known" with pointers to the public policy section.  I
believe the site is being redesigned, and input that invitations
to participation could be bolder would be valuable.

> Similarly, if the NRO expects to effectively counter the 
> ITU's proposal, it
> needs to actively educate government and stakeholders. It is 
> too idealistic
> to say that because ARIN meetings are open to attendence by all that
> government should know and understand the value of ARIN and 
> the NRO and know that it can influence these organisations.

True.  Can you help us target our communications?

> The sudden influx of Africans on the PPML voicing their 
> support for 2003-15
> was notable. Didn't you wonder where they all appeared from 
> or why they were
> so vocal? It was a direct result of ARIN's outreach at iWeek 
> 2003. I also
> followed up by personally sending messages out to the ISPA 
> and IOZ lists and
> spoke to a number of ISPs who had moaned about ARIN to me in the past.

Maybe ARIN should have somebody monitor those lists.  Could be
staff or AC.

Suggest other venues.  ARIN sends representatives to lots of

> I think ARIN has done very well at promoting participation, 
> but given that
> it is not possible to get everyone to participate I think it 
> would be useful
> for ARIN to identify those stakeholders who are unlikely to 
> participate and
> task the AC with considering their interests in each policy 
> proposal. The
> most obvious one is recipients of small re-assignments from LIRS.

The AC is tasked with considering their interests.  You could help
the AC by pointing out to smaller stakeholders that they can provide
input both on PPML and by emailing AC members, who addresses are at
(ARIN's site > About us > Advisory Council)

> In terms of who to engage for further participation in ARIN, 
> I would suggest
> every recipient of an ARIN resource (IP addresses, ASNs, etc) 
> should be told
> more about ARIN as part of their request approval or denial.

I like this idea.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that denials already
come with pointers to the policy process.

> Regards
> Greg

Keep those cards and letters coming, this is exactly the kind of
community participation we're boasting about!


This e-mail is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. 
It may include Blackboard confidential and proprietary information, and is not for redistribution.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list